User:Lydia.Skarivoda/sandbox

Final Article 12/4/18

Liberal feminism does not have a clearly defined set of philosophies, which makes their beliefs abstract. They value individualistic approaches to justice and societal structures instead of blaming inequalities on others. As Susan Wendell states, "liberal feminism's clearest political commitments, including equality of opportunity, are important to women's liberation and not necessarily incompatible with the goals of socialist and radical feminism."

The basis of liberalism gave liberal feminism a familiar enough platform that it came the closest out of other waves to convincing the general public and the government that their feminist philosophies "could and should be incorporated into existing law." As Ryan Musgrave states, "Liberal feminists argued for women's rightful inclusion in the liberal category of the autonomous individual as the basic social unit, and that women likewise be accorded the individual rights connected to the category."

bell hooks' main criticism of the philosophies of liberal feminism is that they focus too much on equality with men in their own class. She mentions that the "cultural basis of group oppression" is the biggest challenge, in that liberal feminists tend to ignore it.

.

I have added this to the liberal feminism Wikipedia page. Here is the link.

Liberal feminism .

.

.

.

.

.

.

Peer Review 10/30/18

Article: Liberal feminism

History[edit]

Much of the time, feminism is messy to explain with respect to the different branches. The acts of feminism that we attempt to organize into categories often overlap. The goal for liberal feminists in the late 1800s and early 1900s was to gain women's suffrage under the idea that they would then gain individual liberty. They were concerned with gaining freedom through equality, putting an end to men's cruelty to women, and gaining the freedom to opportunities to become full persons. They believed that no government or custom should prohibit the exercise of personal freedom. Early liberal feminists had to counter the assumption that only white men deserved to be full citizens. Feminism focusing on the change of laws was emphasized in what we call the first wave of feminism associated with the mid nineteenth to early twentieth century. A trademark of this wave before the 19th amendment was ratified was the Declaration of Sentiments written by Cady Stanton and signed in Seneca Falls, New York in 1848 in front of a crowd of several hundred people. The document demanded legal ability for women to quit being subservient to men and have their own rights in voting and owning things. It also hit on the need for involvement of women in an a variety of aspects such as church, education, and career. Another notable act connected to liberal feminism was the Equal Rights Amendment which was to not allow discrimination based on sex, founded in 1923 but not passed until 1972.[1] Feminists such as Mary Wollstonecraft, Judith Sargent Murray, and Frances Wright advocated for women's full political inclusion. In 1920, after nearly 50 years of intense activism, women were finally granted the right to vote and the right to hold public office in the United States.

[1] Launius, Christie; Hassel, Holly (2018). Threshold Concepts in Women's and Gender Studies: Ways of Seeing, Thinking, and Knowing (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 11, 12.

.


 * 1) Does the draft draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?  It is not persuasive, it only lays out the facts.
 * 2) Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? It's neutral, but I don't like the word "messy" even though it's accurate, it seems informal.
 * 3) Does the draft make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? No, the claims are labeled as belonging to certain people/groups.
 * 4) Does the draft focus too much on negative or positive information? No, it remains very neutral.
 * 5) Are there any unsourced statements in the draft, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? I'm not sure, but I think every sentence should have a source so it can be looked up instead of being mistaken for an opinion. Even if the whole section is the same source, should each sentence be labeled as such?

First Draft 10/24

Under the Philosophy Section- I have already added this paragraph because it was blank before. My plans are to keep these sentences and round it out with a second source. The new sentences will be placed below the paragraph that is already added to the wiki page.

Old part:

Liberal feminism does not have a clearly defined set of philosophies, which makes their beliefs abstract. They value individualistic approaches to justice and societal structures instead of blaming inequalities on others. As Susan Wendell states, "liberal feminism's clearest political commitments, including equality of opportunity, are important to women's liberation and not necessarily incompatible with the goals of socialist and radical feminism."

New part:

The basis of liberalism gave liberal feminism a familiar enough platform that it came the closest out of other waves to convincing the general public and the government that their feminist philosophies "could and should be incorporated into existing law." As Ryan Musgrave states, "Liberal feminists argued for women's rightful inclusion in the liberal category of the autonomous individual as the basic social unit, and that women likewise be accorded the individual rights connected to the category."

.

.

.

.

.

Article Evaluation 9/23 National Organization for Women

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Yes, each section makes sense in the article and is on topic.

Is there anything that distracted you? There are a couple brackets that said "citation needed" and the subtitle "Organizational media" only has one sentence.

Is any information out of date?

No Is anything missing that could be added? A more in depth section on each president possibly? Just an idea.

What else could be improved? There is a link at the bottom under "See also" that brings you to a section in the article itself and not to a separate article. This should be changed or deleted. Also, the "Background" section is rather long and disorganized. May added subtitles would ease readability.

Is the article neutral? Yes, it has a section about criticism that points out the weak points as well as highlighting accomplishments in a neutral tone initially.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, it seems pretty neutral.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? It seems to have been written by someone who supports the group so it is positively talked about but doesn't seem biased at the same time.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Yes!

Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes!

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Yes!

Where does the information come from? The official website for the NOW organization and other credible sources.

Article Evaluation 9/29 Liberal Feminism

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Yes, it is talking about liberal feminism

Is there anything that distracted you? There's a blank header "Philosophy" that I would like to add on to

Is any information out of date? No

Is anything missing that could be added? the Philosophy section

I'm not sure how long our addition to the article is supposed to be, but I plan on quoting this website under the Philosophy section so that it isn't blank. I'm having a hard time finding sources to back every word up instead of just writing about it like a report.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1987.tb01066.x

"Liberal feminism is not committed to a number of philosophical positions for which it is frequently criticized, including abstract individualism, certain individualistic approaches to morality and society, valuing the mental/rational over the physical/emotional, and the traditional liberal way of drawing the line between the public and the private.

Moreover, liberal feminism's clearest political commitments, including equality of opportunity, are important to women's liberation and not necessarily incompatible with the goals of socialist and radical feminism." (Wendell)

What else could be improved? Some of the writing, according to the talk page, is a radical feminist's view on liberal feminism. It is hard to find a truly neutral source definition but it should be neutralized instead of being opinion based.

Is the article neutral? Most of it is but some sections are critical of it.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Yes, "They argue that even if women are not dependent upon individual men, they are still dependent upon a patriarchal state. These critics believe that institutional changes like the introduction of women's suffrage are insufficient to emancipate women." seems to be biased to me, but maybe I'm wrong.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Truly neutral stances are hard to come by in this article.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Yes!

Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes!

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Yes!

Where does the information come from? An Ebook that I don't have access to and various other books as well as articles written by possibly biased sources.

The philosophy of liberal feminism is abstract.

Blah blah blah